Shalvoy v. Curran

Second Circuit

Shalvoy v. Curran

422 F.2d 865

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedFebruary 17, 1970

DocketNo. 417, Docket 33941

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 422 F.2d 865 (Shalvoy v. Curran) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shalvoy v. Curran, 422 F.2d 865 (2d Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The City of Bridgeport, Connecticut was required to be divided into ten alder-manic voting districts as a result of an amendment to the City’s charter adopted by the Connecticut General Assembly in June 1967. See Shalvoy v. Curran, 2 Cir., 393 F.2d 55 (1968).

Plaintiffs-appellants seek to have the districting adopted by the City after our remand in Shalvoy v. Curran, swpra, set aside as violative of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment despite the uneontroverted evidence that the population of each of the ten districts is, as nearly as practicable, equal to the population of every other district, and the population of each district is within a tolerance of less than one per cent of comprising one tenth of the city’s population. The plaintiffs’ complaint, which appears to claim invidious gerrymandering, was dismissed by Judge Blumenfeld below who filed a written memorandum opinion. We affirm the dismissal of the complaint upon that memorandum opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The City of Bridgeport, Connecticut was required to be divided into ten alder-manic voting districts as a result of an amendment to the City’s charter adopted by the Connecticut General Assembly in June 1967. See Shalvoy v. Curran, 2 Cir., 393 F.2d 55 (1968).

Plaintiffs-appellants seek to have the districting adopted by the City after our remand in Shalvoy v. Curran, swpra, set aside as violative of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment despite the uneontroverted evidence that the population of each of the ten districts is, as nearly as practicable, equal to the population of every other district, and the population of each district is within a tolerance of less than one per cent of comprising one tenth of the city’s population. The plaintiffs’ complaint, which appears to claim invidious gerrymandering, was dismissed by Judge Blumenfeld below who filed a written memorandum opinion. We affirm the dismissal of the complaint upon that memorandum opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

422 F.2d 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shalvoy-v-curran-ca2-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack